Blog Highlights of Late

Friday, September 16, 2011

Heinz Foundation Sought to Buy Academic Activism, But Fired Pitt When It Balked

My blog is time- and inclination-dependent. And when I do have the time, or the inclination, I try to aim toward original content, rather than the much easier amplification upon the work of others — a shortcut which seems to define so much of the blogosphere.

This is an easily lost story from the Sept. 7 edition of The Pitt
News, the daily student newspaper of the University of Pittsburgh. It is an innocent, unknowing, worldwide scoop by a student journalist that, to date, no one in the mainstream media has picked up on.

In fact, not even the rabid, conservative outlets seem to have taken notice.

That lack of bounce makes no sense to me. And, having been a highly pumped student journalist once myself, I find that sort of non-response disheartening — to say the least.

In a nutshell, this story is a very quiet smoking gun, exposing the fact that well-endowed representatives of the left wing in America shop for, and buy, political advocacy from within the halls of academia — openly, and without fear of shame, or exposure.

They don't even seem to think there's anything wrong with it.

And, when they don't get the kind of rabble-rousing they want — from within the Ivory Tower — they simply take their money elsewhere.

It's true that business interests also throw around a lot of money, and swing around a lot of influence. But they are usually wayyy more subtle about it.

Heinz Endowments will no longer fund Marcellus Shale gas drilling research at Pitt because the school focused too much on research and not enough on advocacy.

The
University will continue to research the public health impact
surrounding Marcellus Shale gas drilling, but Pitt will no longer run
programs such as FracTracker.org, an online tool collecting data on the
drilling.

Heinz Endowments previously funded the FracTracker database at Pitt with an $1,800,000 grant. The foundation is currently seeking a new place to run its programs.

The
foundation supports projects that aim to improve quality of life in the
Pittsburgh region, and focuses on five disciplines which are
represented by their grant programs: arts and culture, children, youth
and families, education, environment and innovation economy, according
to their web site.

The withdrawn funding marks an end to one of
the most prolific projects for the Center for Healthy Environments &
Communities (CHEC), part of the Graduate School of Public Health. The
center has also had two directors in the past year, and the position is
currently vacant.

Despite withdrawal of funding for the programs,
Allison Schlesinger, a spokeswoman for Pitt’s Graduate School of Public
Health, said Pitt will continue to do research around Marcellus Shale
drilling.

“We will continue to do that research, they’re just not funding it,” Schlesinger said.

Heinz Endowment officials were not immediately available for comment.

Despite
the removal of research programs, Schlesinger said that CHEC is still
grateful for the funding from the endowments for its other programs.

She
said GSPH and Heinz Endowments will “continue to work together to find a
permanent home for FracTracker.org and to establish joint research
priorities.”

Heinz Endowments founded CHEC in 2004 under a grant,
and it will continue to fund multiple research programs at the center
on air quality, water quality and other public health issues that impact
southwestern Pennsylvania, Schlesinger said.

Schlesinger
said Heinz Endowments will no longer fund Marcellus Shale research
programs at Pitt because the center favors research over advocacy.

She said Heinz Endowments officials feel CHEC is not doing enough community outreach and advocacy based on the research.

“CHEC
has become uncomfortable with outreach,” Schlesinger said. “We are a
University research center, of course we favor research. That’s what
we’re supposed to do.”

Schlesinger
said that while the school doesn’t oppose advocacy and outreach, its
primary job is research. She said advocacy and outreach must be
research-based.

The same issue of research versus advocacy caused former director of the center, Dr. Conrad “Dan” Volz Jr., to resign in April. His successor and former dean of GSPH, Dr. Bernard Goldstein, also recently resigned from the position.

The
Pitt News reported in April that Volz said he left because his beliefs
concerning environmental advocacy and public health did not match those
of the University, especially when it came to Marcellus Shale drilling.

The
former Pitt professor is an open critic of Marcellus Shale drilling and
said that the University was not allowing him to openly voice his
dissent, so he left of his own accord.

In the month prior to his
resignation, Volz published controversial research linking drilling to
contaminated drinking water, specifically citing high levels of bromide
in the Josephine brine treatment facility in Indiana County, Pa.

Schlesinger said Goldstein was also an advocate against natural gas drilling and spoke out at numerous community events.

If you'd like to get ahold of me (for purposes other than ceaseless argument), just leave an anonymous comment at the end of any post, and include your email address. I'll email you back (without publishing your comment), and we can talk that way.